DISCOURSE 


OF 

THE  REV.  WILLIAM  M.  TAYLOR,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

Pastor  of  the  Broadway  Tabernacle^  New  York  City, 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2017  with  funding  from 

University  of  Illinois  Urbana-Champaign  Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/discourseofrevwiOOtayl 


MEMORIAL  DISCOURSE. 


“ He  was  a good  man,  and  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  faith.’* 
— Acts  xu  24. 

This  is  a remarkable  eulogy.  It  was  written  by 
Luke  at  the  close  of  the  second  year  of  Paul’s  first 
imprisonment,  and  therefore  in  the  full  knowledge 
of  all  the  facts  connected  with  the  breach  between 
the  great  Apostle  and  Barnabas,  which  ended  in 
their  departing  “ asunder  one  from  another,”  and 
of  which  the  account  comes  in  at  a later  part  of  his 
narrative.  For  years  the  Evangelist  had  been  the 
constant  companion  and  intimate  friend  of  the 
Apostle,  and,  as  such,  we  may  suppose  that  he  had 
received  all  the  details  of  the  unhappy  controversy 
from  his  lips ; yet  in  spite  of  all  that  had  come  and 
gone  between  them,  he  takes  this  early  and  inci- 
dental opportunity,  which  the  mention  of  his  first 
visit  to  Antioch  affords,  to  put  on  record  his  de- 
liberate estimate  of  his  character  and  worth.  Here 
and  there,  too,  in  the  epistles  of  Paul,  there  are 
casual  allusions,  which  show  that  in  the  verdict  here 
pronounced  he  fully  concurred  ; so  that  its  presence 
in  this  place  is  alike  honorable  to  all  three  — to 


48 


Barnabas  as  thoroughly  deserving  this  noble  trib- 
ute ; to  Paul  as  showing  that  the  controversy  over 
Mark  had  left  no  permanent  estrangement  in  his 
heart ; and  to  Luke  as  proving  the  judicial  imparti- 
ality with  which  he  wrote  his  history. 

But,  striking  as  this  testimony  to  Barnabas  is,  when 
we  regard  the  circumstances  in  which  it  was  given,  it  is 
no  less  noteworthy  in  itself  considered  ; for  its  sole 
emphasis  is  laid  on  moral  and  spiritual  qualities.  The 
greatness  of  this  early  disciple  was  in  his  goodness  ; 
that  goodness,  again,  was  rooted  in  his  faith,  and 
the  whole  was  vitalized  by  the  indwelling  Spirit, 
whose  influence  pervaded  the  life,  and  gave  it  that 
amiability  and  attractiveness  by  which  it  was  dis- 
tinguished. Barnabas  was  not  deficient  in  intel- 
lectual ability,  neither  was  he  destitute  of  mental 
independence  or  moral  energy  ; but  the  totality  of 
the  man — that  by  which  he  was  best  known  and  for 
which  he  was  most  fondly  remembered — was  his 
goodness.  He  was  loved  even  more  that  he  was 
admired ; and  even  those  who  had  seriously  differed 
from  him  were  constrained  to  speak  of  him  with 
tenderest  affection. 

You  will  not  wonder,  therefore,  that  in  seeking 
an  appropriate  text  for  the  memorial  discourse 
which  this  evening,  at  the  request  of  the  Faculty 
of  this  College,  I am  come  to  deliver,  I have  been 
led  to  select  that  which  I have  just  announced. 


49 


For  though  intellectually  and  theologically  Dr.  At- 
water had  much  that  resembled  Paul  rather  than 
Barnabas  ; though  he  was  one  of  the  most  versatile 
and  many-sided  men  whom  I have  ever  known  ; all 
his  other  characteristics  were  fused  into  a unit  by 
his  pre-eminent  goodness  ; and  that,  in  its  turn, 
was  permeated  by  his  Christian  faith.  No  one 
could  know  him  without  loving  him,  and  perceiv- 
ing that  he  loved  the  Lord ; so  that,  though  in  his 
time  he  had  taken  part  in  earnest  controversies,  and 
had  been  in  many  conflicts,  when  he  passed  away 
from  us  the  universal  ejaculatiom  from  former  an- 
tagonists and  former  allies  alike  was  this — “ He  was 
a good  man.” 

I could  have  wished  that  the  duty  which  has  been 
assigned  to  me  had  been  committed  to  some  one 
who  had  known  him  longer,  and  could  speak  from 
personal  participation  in  the  movements  with  which 
he  was  identified ; but  when  the  work  was  laid  on 
me,  I could  not  refuse  to  place  a wreath  upon  the 
grave  of  one  whose  friendship  I counted  one  of  my 
highest  honors ; and  though  the  wreath  be  made 
of  material  as  simple  as  the  heather  of  my  native 
hills,  it  will  at  least  attest  the  sincerity  of  my  affec- 
tion for  him  who  was  so  greatly  beloved  by  us  all. 

Lyman  Hotchkiss  Atwater  was  born  at  Cedar 
Hill,  now  a part  of  New  Haven,  Conn.,  February 


50 


23,  1813.  He  was  descended  from  one  of  the  first 
settlers  of  the  colony,  and  his  parents  had  all  the 
characteristics  of  the  Puritan  stock  to  which  they 
belonged.  He  has  himself  described  the  formative 
influences  under  which  his  early  days  were  spent 
in  the  following  sentences,  which  we  take  from  his 
noble  article  on  Horace  Bushnell : * “ We  recall  the 
Puritanical,  almost  Jewish  Sabbath  observance ; 
church -going  through  wintry  blasts  into  the  un- 
warmed ‘meeting-house,’  to  hear  theology  reasoned 
out  through  two  sermons ; the  drill  in  the  Shorter 
Catechism  ; the  common  school  with  its  rough 
oaken  seats  and  sometimes  rougher  teachers ; the 
toilsome  industry  which  extorted  a frugal  subsist- 
ence from  rocky  soils,  or  by  the  slow  process  of 
handiwork  in  producing  what  steam  and  electricity 
and  machinery  will  now  yield  in  vastly  greater  pro- 
fusion and  superior  quality  to  a tithe  of  the  labor. 
We  now  seem  to  hear  the  rattle  of  the  household 
spinning-wheel  to  produce  the  thread  or  yarn,  for 
the  very  weaving  of  which  was  paid  double  what 
the  same  amount  of  cloth  already  finished,  and  bet- 
ter fitted  for  the  same  use,  would  now  cost.  It  is 
scarcely  possible  for  those  whose  lives  do  not  run 
back  of  the  half  century  now  closing  to  conceive  of 
the  severe  style  of  life  and  manners  then  prevalent 


* The  Presbyterian  Review,  vol.  ii.,  p.  1 1 5. 


SI 

from  dire  necessity.”  A rough  nurture  that  “Age 
of  Homespun  ” gave  to  those  who  were  born  into 
it ; but  it  made  them  men,  and  hardened  them  into 
sturdy  mental  independence  as  well  as  into  physical 
vigor. 

After  his  first  course  of  education  at  the  pub- 
lic school,  he  was  prepared  for  college  by  Dr. 
H.  P.  Arms,  afterward  pastor  of  the  Congrega- 
tional church  in  Norwich,  Conn.  ; and  at  the  age 
of  14  he  entered  the  Freshman  class  at  Yale  in 
1827.  He  was  a distinguished  student,  and  at  his 
graduation  in  1831  he  received  the  second  honor  of 
his  class  ; but  during  the  last  year  of  his  course  a 
richer  blessing  came  to  him  than  any  such  literary 
eminence,  excellent  as  in  its  own  place  that  is, 
could  confer;  for  in  the  spring  of  1831  a deep, 
earnest,  and  powerful,  though  quiet  “ revival  ” per- 
vaded the  College,  and  left  its  deposit  of  lasting 
and  germinant  influence  in  his  heart  and  life.  “ We, 
too,”  he  says,  while  alluding  to  the  quickening 
which  Bushnell  received  on  that  memorable  occa- 
sion, “ participated  in  the  same  great  awakening,  in 
which  the  ‘ still  small  voice  ’ of  the  Spirit  was  so 
mighty,  that  for  days  the  usual  din  of  conversation 
at  meals  in  the  great  dining-hall  was  hushed  into  very 
whispers.”*  He  had  been  trained,  as  we  have  seen. 


* The  Presbyterian  Review,  vol.  ii.,  p.  Ii6. 


Li’’"ARY 

university  of  ILLINOIS 


52 


in  a Christian  home,  and  now  the  new  life  within 
him,  lifted  up  into  itself,  and  made  its  own  all  that 
was  best  in  his  previous  experience,  thereby  giving 
a moral  and  spiritual  unity  to  his  character,  so  that 
thenceforward  the  Christian  in  him  was  conspicu- 
ous, not  by  ostentatious  display,  but  by  pervasive 
power. 

After  a year  spent  near  Baltimore  in  teaching  the 
classics  at  Mount  Hope  Seminary,  he  returned  to 
New  Haven,  and  in  the  fall  of  1832  he  entered  on 
the  study  of  theology  at  the  Yale  Divinity  vSchool. 
In  1833  he  was  appointed  a tutor  in  the  College, 
but  he  continued  his  theological  studies  side  by  side 
with  his  work  as  an  instructor,  and  these  years 
probably  did  more  than  any  others  in  his  opening 
manhood  to  shape  the  course  of  his  subsequent 
career.  Already,  in  his  undergraduate  life,  he  had 
become  noted,  along  with  his  friend  Noah  Porter, 
now  the  honored  President  of  Yale,  for  his  devo- 
tion to  intellectual  philosophy  ; and  when  he  re- 
turned from  Baltimore  to  begin  the  study  of  theol- 
ogy, his  former  discussions  with  fellow-students  on 
metaphysical  subjects  were  resumed  with  all  the 
ardor  and  enthusiasm  of  youth.  A company  of 
four  are  especially  named  by  him'^'  as  having  been 
“ most  addicted  to  philosophical  study,  and  wont  to 


* '‘Memorial  Discourse  on  Elisha  Lord  Cleaveland,”  p.  29. 


53 


probe  questions  to  the  bottom  by  original  investi- 
gations beyond  the  deliverances  of  the  lecture- 
room.”  They  occupied  adjoining  apartments  in 
the  upper  story  of  a house,  which,  because  of  their 
continual  debates,  was  known  among  their  fellow- 
students  by  the  sobriquet  of  the  “ Philosophical 
Garret.”  One  of  the  four  was  Dr.  Cleaveland,  after- 
ward pastor  of  a church  in  New  Haven  ; another 
became  a missionary  to  Turkey  and  afterward 
librarian  of  the  New  York  State  Library  at  Alba- 
ny ; the  third  was  Dr.  Atwater  himself  ; and  the 
fourth  was  that  life-long  friend  whose  voice  was  so 
fitly  heard  in  loving  eulogy  over  the  bier  of  his 
early  companion.  I mention  all  this  here  because 
it  is  full  of  suggestiveness,  especially  to  students, 
as  serving  to  remind  them  that  the  training  which 
they  give  to  each  other  in  intellectual  athletics,  is 
often  of  almost  as  great  importance  as  that  which 
they  receive  directly  from  the  professors  in  the 
class-rooms. 

At  this  time,  too,  it  was,  that  Dr.  Atwater  came 
under  the  influence  of  Coleridge.  The  “ Aids  to 
Reflection,”  published  in  England  some  seven  or 
eight  years  before  (in  1825),  had  found  its  way  into 
the  hands  of  these  young  men,  and  greatly  stirred 
their  minds.  It  is  interesting,  at  this  distance,  to 
trace  the  different  directions  in  which  the  quicken- 
ing force  of  the  poet-philosopher  has  carried  those 


54 


who  came  under  its  operation.  Some,  like  Carlyle, 
having  reached  the  stage  of  Titanic  defiance  describ- 
ed in  his  chapter  on  “The  Everlasting  No.”  before 
they  came  into  eontaet  with  the  Highgate  sage, 
ridiculed  his  utteranees  as  “ moonshine.”  Others 
were  sent  by  them  into  ritualism ; and  more 
perhaps  were  carried  by  them  into  Broad  Church- 
ism  ; while  there  were  not  a few  who,  like  his 
American  editor.  Dr.  Shedd,  and  our  friend  Dr.  At- 
water, were  stiffened  by  their  contact  with  him,  into 
a more  stalwart  orthodoxy.  The  reason  of  all  this 
may,  perhaps,  be  found  in  the  fragmentary  and  dis- 
jointed charaeter  of  his  writings.  It  is  questionable 
if  he  had  ever  reached  a system  in  his  own  mind ; 
but  whether  he  had  or  not,  he  has  nowhere  given 
systematic  completeness  to  his  teachings.  His 
philosophy,  as  Dr.  Shedd  has  said,  “ must  be  gather- 
ed from  his  writings  rather  than  quoted  from 
them.”*  Those  who  have  not  had  the  patience  to 
make  such  an  induction,  have  simply  carried  away 
from  him  the  general  stimulus  which  his  thinking 
gave  them,  and  the  special  suggestions  which  fitted 
into  their  own  tastes  and  idiosyncrasies ; while 
others  who  have  been  awakened  by  him  into  inde- 
pendent research  have  shaken  themselves  clear  of 
his  mysticism,  and  have  been  grateful  ever  after- 


The  complete  works  of  Samuel  Taylor  Coleridge,  vol.  i.,  p.  lo. 


55 


ward  for  the  quickening  and  impulse  they  have  re- 
ceived at  his  hands.  Among  these  last  was  Dr.  At- 
water. As  he  has  said  of  Dr.  Cleaveland,  so  we 
may  say  of  himself,  that  “ he  was  one  of  those  who 
profited  by  Coleridge’s  writings,  because  he  knew 
how  to  separate  the  chaff  from  the  wheat,  master- 
ing, instead  of  being  mastered  by  them.”*  Indeed 
that  is  substantially  what  he  has  said  for  himself  in 
his  own  excellent  article  on  Coleridge,  for  after  re- 
ferring to  the  imperfect  development  of  that  author’s 
ideas,  he  goes  on  to  say  that  by  that  very  thing 
“ the  reader  would  be  excited  to  thought  and  study, 
and  every  sort  of  tentative  effort,  to  track  out  the 
germinant  thought  to  its  full  proportions,  and  realize 
all  the  hidden  treasures  it  embosomed.  It  shot  into 
his  mind  the  dawn  of  a new  idea ; he  can  not  rest 
till  he  has  clarified  that  twilight  apprehension  or 
imagining  into  meridian  clearness.  Now  this  oper- 
ates at  once  as  the  effective  stimulus  and  discipline 
of  the  intellect ; and  provided  only  that  it  does  not 
lead  to  a servile  adoption  of  the  author’s  tenets,  its 
influence  is  every  way  salubrious  and  invigorating, 
and  a vastly  higher  benefit  is  gained  by  studying 
such  a writer  than  one  who  does  not  awaken  such 
mental  strivings  to  work  out  for  ourselves  the  prob- 
lem that  he  has  rather  suggested  than  solved.  And 


Memorial  of  Rev.  E.  L.  Cleaveland,  p.  30. 


56 


those  who  have,  especially  in  youth  or  opening  man- 
hood, received  such  a lofty  impulse  and  incalculable 
benefit  from  any  author,  will  not  soon  forget  their 
obligations  to  him  whatever  they  may  think  of  his 
specific  or  peculiar  doctrines.”*  We  can  not  but 
feel  that  all  this  is  autobiographical,  and  that  we 
have  here  described  the  history  of  his  own  relation 
to  the  works  of  Coleridge.  For  one  benefit  he  is 
repeatedly  grateful  to  the  English  philosopher.  In 
the  course  of  his  numerous  writings  he  has  quoted 
oftener  than  once  the  following  sentences  from  the 
“Aids  to  Reflection”  ; “Often  have  I heard  it  said 
by  the  advocates  for  the  Socinian  scheme — True 
we  are  all  sinners  ; but  even  in  the  Old  Testament 
God  has  promised  forgiveness  on  repentance.  One 
of  the  fathers  (I  forget  which)  supplies  the  retort : 
True  ! God  has  promised  pardon  on  penitence  ; but 
has  He  promised  penitence  on  sin?  He  that  re- 
penteth  shall  be  forgiven  ; but  where  is  it  said,  he 
that  sinneth  shall  repent  ? But  repentance,  perhaps, 
the  repentance  required  in  Scripture,  the  passing 
into  a new  mind,  into  a new  and  contrary  principle 
of  action,  this  Metanoia,  is  in  the  sinner’s  own 
power  ? at  his  own  liking  ? He  has  but  to  open  his 
eyes  to  the  sin,  and  the  tears  are  at  hand  to  wash  it 
away  ! V erily  the  exploded  tenet  of  transubstantia- 


The  Princeto7t  Review,  April,  1848,  pp.  163,  164. 


57 


tion  is  scarcely  at  greater  variance  with  the  com- 
mon sense  and  experience  of  mankind,  or  borders 
more  closely  on  a contradiction  in  terms,  than  this 
volunteer  transmentation,  this  self-change  as  the  easy 
means  of  self-salvation.”  These  sentenees,  as  I have 
said,  I have  found  quoted  at  least  twice  in  his  arti- 
cles, and  on  each  occasion  with  appended  remarks 
which  have  in  them  the  ring  of  a personal  experi- 
ence ; for  on  the  first  he  speaks  of  the  passage  as 
one  “ which  soon  after  its  publication  met  the  eye 
of  a theological  student  who  had  begun  to  be  capti- 
vated by  the  Pelagian  speculations  of  the  day,  and 
started  a most  beneficial  revolution  in  all  his  views 
of  theology”;'^  and  on  the  second  he  says,  “This 
has  flashed  a flood  of  light  on  more  than  one  soul 
bewildered  in  its  struggles  to  realize  in  himself  the 
theory  that  he  was  able  to  make  himself  a Christian, 
while  it  has  proved  a turning  and  guide-board  for 
his  whole  after  career.”f  When  to  these  statements 
I add  that  he  said  to  one  of  his  students  only 
eighteen  months  before  his  death,  that  he  could  not 
exaggerate  the  influenee  of  the  “ Aids  to  Reflec- 
tion ” on  his  mind,  and  that  though  far  from  being 
a Coleridgean  he  regarded  his  perusal  of  that  book 
as  an  epoch  in  his  life  : I am  surely  warranted  in 
drawing  special  attention  to  that  whieh  on  his  own 


* The  Princeton  Review ^ April,  1848,  pp.  181,  182. 
t The  Presbyterian  Review,  vol.  ii.,  p.  124. 


58 


testimony  so  materially  influenced  Dr.  Atwater’s 
history. 

At  the  time  to  which  we  are  referring,  the  Rev. 
Dr.  N.  W.  Taylor  was  stirring  the  thought  of  New 
England  by  his  eloquent  and  vigorous  advocacy 
of  that  system  which  came  to  be  known  as  the  New 
Haven  Theology  ; but  though  drawn  most  affection- 
ately to  Dr.  Taylor  as  the  pastor  of  his  boyhood, 
Dr.  Atwater  could  not  receive  his  teacher’s  theorv, 
that  all  moral  goodness  is  reducible  to  some  form  of 
self-love,  or  means  of  happiness  to  the  agent ; and  in 
many  other  details  of  his  system,  of  more  or  less 
importance,  which  need  not  here  be  named,  he  was 
stimulated  to  antagonism  by  the  very  ability  of  his 
master.  Hence,  he  probably  derived  more  quicken- 
ing from  Dr.  Taylor’s  course  of  lectures,  than  he 
would  have  done  if  he  had  implicitly  received  their 
doctrines,  and  for  the  rejection  of  one  of  these,  the 
determining  impulse,  as  we  have  seen,  was  given  him 
by  Coleridge.  In  any  case,  at  the  end  of  his  theo- 
logical course,  he  emerged  a thorough  Calvinist,  of 
the  Old-School  type,  and  on  that  line  he  travelled 
till  the  close  of  life. 

In  May,  1834,  Mr.  Atwater  was  licensed  to 
preach  the  Gospel  by  the  New  Haven  West  Asso- 
ciation, and  on  the  29th  July,  1835,  he  was  ordained 
and  installed  pastor  of  the  First  Congregational 
Church  of  Fairfield,  Connecticut,  which  is  one  of 


59 


the  oldest  churches  in  that  State,  and  which  had  en- 
joyed for  many  years  the  ministrations  of  a series 
of  distinguished  men.  Here  he  labored  for  nine- 
teen years  with  great  ability  and  acceptance,  and 
hither  in  October,  1835,  he  led  home  the  wife  of  his 
affection,  who  cheered  his  domestic  life  with  her 
genial  companionship  until  the  day  when,  after 
years  of  weakness  which  he  brightened  by  the  most 
tender  care,  she  was  taken  from  his  side  into  the 
heavenly  mansion. 

Only  two  things  connected  with  his  pastorate 
need  to  be  particularly  mentioned  here,  as  serving 
to  show  the  sort  of  man  he  was.  The  first  was 
the  part  which  he  took  in  the  controversy  which 
arose  over  the  theological  teachings  of  the  late  Dr. 
Horace  Bushnell,  as  these  had  been  embodied  in  his 
work  entitled  “ God  in  Christ.”  The  whole  dis- 
cussion has  now  become  a matter  of  history,  the 
record  of  which  may  be  found  on  the  one  side  in 
the  recently  issued  life  of  Bushnell  by  his  daughter, 
and  on  the  other  in  Dr.  Atwater’s  article  in  the  Prince- 
ton Review  ior  October,  1853;  and  latterly  in  the 
splendid  dissertation  on  Dr.  Bushnell,  which  he  con- 
tributed to  the  Presbyterian  Review  for  January, 
1881,  and  which  reveals  the  finest  qualities  both  of 
his  head  and  of  his  heart.  It  is  unnecessary,  here,  to 
specify  the  subjects  concerning  which  the  conflict 
was  waged  ; enough  to  say  that  they  were  questions 


6o 


of  the  highest  importance,  and  that  Dr.  Atwater 
bore  himself  all  through  like  one  who  neither  de- 
sired controversy  nor  feared  it.  On  each  side  were 
ranged  men  of  the  highest  ability  and  the  noblest 
character ; under  leaders  concerning  both  of  whom 
Dr.  Atwater  has  said  that  they  were  even  “ finest 
types  of  the  clergy  of  their  time  ; and  the  spirit 
by  which  he  was  animated  throughout  may  be  gath- 
ered from  these  sentences : “ With  untold  reluc- 
tance, labor,  anxiety,  cost  of  so  much  that  was  dear, 
they  went  forward  to  the  end.  They  discharged 
their  consciences — with  what  effect  it  is  given  us  to 
know  only  in  part.  The  leaders  on  the  other  side 
of  this  conflict  consisted  largely  of  those  endeared 
to  me,  at  least,  by  life-long  ties,  tenderest  of  all  out- 
side of  my  own  household.  I can  see  how,  looking 
more  at  Dr.  Bushnell  on  sides  which  satisfy  and  de- 
light than  on  those  which  appall  and  confound, 
than  did  others,  they  should  have  advocated  a course 
so  different  from  that  which  seemed  to  very  many 
imperative.  I hope  and  pray  that  the  policy  which, 
then  inaugurated,  has  gained  increasing  headway 
since,  of  preventing  the  trial  of  ministers  who 
furnish  strong  prima  facie  ground  for  trial,  will  not 
issue  in  the  evils  to  the  old  loved  churches  of  my 
nativity  and  nurture  which  have  been  so  much  pre- 


* Presbyterian  Review,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  138,  139,  note. 


6i 


dieted.”*  And  there  is  something  inexpressibly 
touching  in  the  mellow  sweetness  of  his  final  refer- 
ence to  him  who  had  been  the  occasion  of  the  con- 
troversy, when,  after  mentioning  one  defect  in  Dr. 
Bushnell’s  character,  he  adds  : 

“ It  is  a pleasing  compensation  for  this,  that  it 
was  so  free  from  ‘ envy,  malice,  and  uncharitable- 
ness ’ toward  men  ; so  filled,  despite  all  unhappy 
speculations,  with  all  the  fulness  of  God  in  Christ. 
Few  have  so  much  of  that  creative  imagination 
which  makes  it  ‘a  vision  and  faculty  divine.’  He 
was  more  of  a seer  than  a constructive  reasoner. 
Doubtless  any  obliquities  or  shadows  that  marred 
his  beholdings  here  are  now  cleared  away  in  the  im- 
mediate vision  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb.”f  Thus 
the  debates  of  controversy,  though  firmly  carried 
on  by  Dr.  Atwater,  were  not  suffered  to  embitter 
his  heart ; and  to  those  who  know  the  history  of 
the  conflict,  the  article  from  which  I have  made 
these  extracts  is  one  of  the  finest  examples  of  the 
power  of  Christian  love  in  lifting  the  spirit  above 
all  prejudices  and  partisanships,  which  the  English 
language  affords.  In  the  controversy  and  after  it. 
Dr.  Atwater  was  pre-eminently  “ a good  man,”  and 
he  retained  to  the  last  the  esteem  and  affection  of 
some  of  those  who  were  most  strenuously  opposed 


* Presbyterian  Review y ut  supra,  p.  138. 
t Presbyterian  Review y ut  supra,  p.  144. 


62 


to  him,  even  as  they  also  continued  to  be  the  ob- 
jects of  his  sincere  regard. 

But  though  constrained  by  conscience  to  interest 
himself  thus  in  what  may  be  called  the  public  Church 
questions  of  his  times,  he  was  not  neglectful  of  his 
pastoral  work.  One  of  his  successors  in  the  ministry 
bears  this  testimony  to  his  wisdom  and  love  in  the 
matter  of  church  extension  : 

“ Three  substantial  church  buildings,  now  occu- 
pied by  flourishing  congregations,  were  erected  in 
the  town  of  Fairfield  during  his  ministry.  One  was 
for  the  accommodation  of  the  old  church  itself,  and 
it  still  stands  in  its  beauty  to  bear  testimony  to  his 
diligence  and  energy.  Previous  to  its  erection, 
however,  some  members  of  the  church  who  lived 
two  miles  away,  in  the  part  of  Fairfield  known  as 
Southport,  thinking  that  they  could  in  that  way 
serve  the  cause  of  Christ,  asked  and  obtained  the 
consent  of  their  pastor  to  organize  a new  church, 
and  in  all  the  steps  necessary  to  be  taken  in  building 
both  the  spiritual  and  material  edifice  the  well-be- 
loved pastor  cheerfully  assisted.  Several  years  later 
a similar  step  was  taken  by  the  people  in  another 
section  of  the  town,  and  the  thriving  church  at 
Black  Rock  was  organized  chiefly  by  the  members 
of  the  old  First  church,  some  of  whom  still  live  and 
vie  with  those  who  remained  under  his  care,  in  their 
love  and  admiration  for  their  former  pastor.”  * 


* Edward  E.  Rankin,  D.D.,  now  of  Newark,  N.  J. 


63 


What  like  his  public  ministrations  were  may  be 
gathered  from  his  articles  on  “ The  Matter  of  Preach- 
ing,” and  “ The  Manner  of  Preaching,”  * the  former 
of  which  was  written  in  1856,  just  after  he  had  left 
the  pulpit  for  the  professor’s  chair,  and  was  so  highly 
regarded,  that  it  was  credited  to  Dr.  James  W.  Alex- 
ander, and  printed,  by  mistake,  as  his,  in  the  pos- 
thumous volume  on  Preaching  by  that  eloquent 
divine,  which  has  taken  its  place  as  a standard  in 
the  department  of  Homiletics.  It  may  be  regarded 
as  a summation  by  himself  of  the  kind  of  work 
which  he  set  himself  to  do  at  Fairfield,  and  it  ought 
to  be  pondered  by  all  young  ministers  and  students 
of  Theology  as  containing,  in  the  briefest  compass, 
the  concentrated  essence  of  the  truth  on  the  subject 
of  which  it  treats.  Judging  from  its  statements  his 
aim  in  the  pulpit  was  to  exalt  God  before  his  peo- 
ple as  Maker,  Preserver,  Benefactor,  Sovereign, 
Saviour,  and  Judge  ; to  enforce  the  law  under  which 
man  is  placed  ; to  proclaim  Christ  as  the  object 
toward  which  faith,  love,  hope,  obedience,  and  devo- 
tion are  to  be  directed ; to  answer  the  questions. 
What  shall  I believe  ? what  shall  I love  ? what  shall  I 
do,  in  order  to  lead  a righteous,  sober,  and  godly 
life,  and  that  when  Christ  shall  appear,  I also  may 
appear  with  Him  in  glory?  and  to  enforce  the  ex- 


* See  Princeton  Review  for  October,  1856,  and  April,  1863. 


64 


ercise  of  religious  principles  and  all  the  virtues  of 
our  holy  religion  in  every  sphere  of  life  and  action. 
With  all  his  leanings  toward  philosophical  studies, 
he  did  not  carry  metaphysics  into  the  pulpit,  and  to 
this  day  the  Fairfield  people  speak  with  gratitude  of 
the  practical  Biblical  instruction  which  they  received 
at  his  lips.  His  great  object  was  to  divide  rightly 
the  word  of  truth,  and  so  “to  glorify  God  and 
bless  men  by  bringing  sinners  to  the  obedience  of  faith 
in  Christ,  and  promoting  their  sanctification,  their 
knowledge,  love,  and  adoration  of  God  ; their  as- 
similation, conformity,  and  devotion  to  Him  in 
thought,  desire,  word,  and  deed  ; their  cordial  and 
delighted  communion  with  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost ; their  love,  gentleness,  meekness,  patience, 
uprightness,  and  faithfulness  toward  their  fellow- 
men.”*  He  had  little  confidence  in  exceptional 
and  spasmodic  methods,  for  reasons  which  he  has 
given  in  his  article  on  Revivals,f  and  which  had  their 
root  in  principles  rather  than  in  mere  taste  ; but  he 
set  himself  to  the  fullest  improvement  of  the  “ or- 
dinary means  of  grace,”  and  sought  thereby  to  ad- 
vance his  people  “ in  all  holy  conversation  and  god- 
liness.” So  as  the  years  revolved,  he  had  the  hap- 
piness of  seeing  those  committed  to  his  care  grow- 
ing in  Christian  intelligence,  and  manifesting  “ the 


» * Princeto7t  Review,  October,  1856,  p.  659. 
t Princeton  Review,  January,  1842. 


A;. 


6s 


fruit  of  the  Spirit  ” in  that  roundness  of  symmetri- 
cal character,  of  which  he  was  himself  so  conspicu- 
ous an  example. 

But  though  he  did  not  take  philosophy  into  the 
pulpit,  he  had  not  forsworn  it  in  the  study  ; and  in 
the  comparative  leisure  which  a country  pastorate 
afforded,  he  found  time  for  writing  many  excellent 
contributions  to  the  periodical  press  on  those  sub- 
jects which,  from  the  days  of  his  student  life,  even 
to  the  last,  had  pre-eminent  attraction  for  his  mind. 
His  earliest  article  in  the  Princeton  Review,  on  “ The 
Power  of  Contrary  Choice,”  was  printed  in  1 840,  only 
five  years  after  his  ordination  to  the  ministry,  and 
almost  each  succeeding  year  on  to  the  close  of  his  pas- 
torate, one  or  more  contributions  from  his  pen  ap- 
peared in  its  pages.  The  mental  power  which  these 
productions  evinced  secured  for  him  the  degree  of 
D.D.  from  the  Trustees  of  this  institution  in  1851  ; 
and  so  impressed  them  with  a sense  of  his  special 
ability  in  that  department  that  in  1854  he  was  ap- 
pointed by  them  Professor  of  Mental  and  Moral 
Philosophy  in  the  College  of  New  Jersey.  Here 
the  remainder  of  his  life  was  spent,  and  how  quiet- 
ly, how  diligently,  with  what  Christian  humility,  and 
yet  with  what  pure  dignity  ; with  what  minute  at- 
tention to  his  professional  duties  and  yet  with  what 
patriotic  public  spirit ; with  what  unaffected  piety 
and  yet  with  what  human  naturalness,  he  [bore  him- 


66 


self  through  all  those  nine  and  twenty  years,  is  known 
to  every  inhabitant  of  Princeton.  His  change  of 
residence  brought  with  it  a change  in  his  ecclesiasti- 
cal relationships  ; but  that  was  easily  consummated, 
for  the  difference  between  the  Consociationism  of 
Connecticut,  to  which  he  had  been  accustomed,  and 
the  Presbyterianism  of  New  Jersey,  to  which  he 
came,  was  not  great ; and  the  separation  from  beloved 
friends  in  the  neighborhood  of  Fairfield  was  largely 
compensated  by  his  proximity  to  Dr.  Charles  Hodge, 
for  whom  he  had  long  cherished  an  ardent  admira- 
tion, and  whom,  as  the  years  went  on,  he  regarded 
with  an  affection  that  was  allied  to  reverence.  He 
continued  to  write  for  the  Princeton  Review  ; was, 
probably,  its  largest  contributor,  and  became,  in 
1 869,  its  virtual  and  responsible  editor.  Then  when, 
at  the  reunion  of  the  churches  in  1872,  that  period- 
ical was  amalgamated  with  the  American  Quarterly, 
he  was  joint  editor  with  Dr.  Henry  B.  Smith,  of 
the  Union  Seminary,  New  York  ; but  owing  to  the 
feeble  health  of  his  coadjutor,  the  larger  share  of 
the  burden  fell  upon  him,  until,  in  1878,  t\\t  Review 
passed  into  other  hands,  and  assumed  the  character 
which  it  still  maintains.  In  1861  he  was  appointed 
Lecturer  in  the  Theological  Seminary  here,  on  the 
connection  between  Revealed  Religion  and  Meta- 
physical Science,  an  office  which  he  filled  with  mark- 
ed ability  and  success  for  five  years.  In  1862  he 


6; 


was  successful  by  dint  of  great  labor,  and  at  the 
cost  of  a serious  illness,  in  raising  an  Endowment 
Fund  of  $140,000  for  the  College,  which  was  then 
sorely  crippled  by  the  effect  of  the  civil  war.  In 
the  estimation  of  almost  all  its  friends  the  effort  was 
a “ forlorn  hope,”  but  the  patient  energy  and  wise 
persistence  of  Dr.  Atwater  made  it  a complete  suc- 
cess. In  1863  he  was  unanimously  appointed  by 
the  General  Assembly  to  the  Professorship  of  The- 
ology in  the  Allegheny  Seminary,  but,  to  the  joy 
of  all  the  friends  of  Princeton  College,  he  decided 
to  remain  as  one  of  its  Instructors. 

In  1869,  on  the  accession  of  Dr.  McCosh  to  the 
Presidency,  he  cheerfully  consented  to  transfer  the 
subjects  of  Psychology  and  the  History  of  Philos- 
ophy to  that  eminent  metaphysician,  receiving  in- 
stead those  of  Economics  and  Politics,  so  that 
from  that  date  until  his  death  he  was  Professor  of 
Logic,  and  Moral  and  Political  Science.  He  took 
an  interested  and  important  part  in  ecclesiastical 
affairs,  and  was  a member  of  the  joint  committee 
which  perfected  the  basis  of  union  in  which  the  Old 
and  New  School  Presbyterian  churches  were  able  to 
come  together ; and  in  the  various  Assemblies  of 
which  he  was  a member,  he  was  always  a guiding 
spirit,  but  never  surely  in  a more  appropriate  place 
than  when,  as  in  that  of  1880,  he  was  Chairman  of 
the  Judieial  Committee.  In  all  these  ways,  but  es- 


68 


pecially  through  the  pages  of  the  Princeton  Review, 
which  was  so  powerful  in  impressing  the  opinions 
of  its  conductors  on  those  whose  province  it  is  to 
teach  others,  and  through  these  upon  the  Church 
and  the  world,  his  influence  was  widely  exerted,  not 
only  on  theological,  but  on  philosophical,  ethical, 
and  social  subjects. 

But  these  outside  labors,  large  as  they  were,  were 
but  the  overflow  of  a life  that  otherwise  was  full. 
They  were  but  the  accessories  and  incidental  ac- 
companiments of  his  main  business.  That  business 
was  the  work  of  an  Educator,  and  therein  he  was 
pre-eminent.  Few  men  have  been  more  successful 
than  he  was,  in  training  thinkers.  He  impressed 
all  his  pupils  with  his  perfect  mastery  of  the  sub- 
jects with  which  he  had  to  deal.  They  admired  the 
clearness  of  his  expositions  ; the  fairness  with  which 
he  stated  the  opinions  of  those  from  whom  he 
differed ; the  absolute  impartiality  with  which  he 
criticised  the  views  of  others  ; and  the  candid  spirit 
in  which  he  advanced  his  own.  He  would  not  do 
their  thinking  for  his  students ; but  he  furnished 
them  with  the  needful  data,  and  then  encouraged 
them  to  form  their  own  opinions  while  he  stood  by 
ready  to  guide  them  in  the  effort.  They  felt,  more- 
over, that  he  understood  not  only  his  subjects,  but 
his  students.  He  never  forgot  that  he  had  once 
been  a young  man  himself,  and  he  could  put  him- 


69 


self  back  into  the  place  of  an  undergraduate  and 
look  at  things  from  his  point  of  view,  with  greater 
ease  and  accuracy  than  most  men  of  his  age  and 
acquirements. 

But  all  this  I give  on  the  evidence  of  testimony, 
for  it  never  was  my  privilege  to  see  him  in  the 
class-room,  and  therefore  I may  be  pardoned  for  in- 
troducing here  one  or  two  tributes,  corroboratory 
of  what  I have  just  said,  which  I have  received  from 
some  of  his  students.  A member  of  the  class  of  ’6i, 
himself  now  a Theological  Professor,*  thus  writes  : 
“ Dr.  Atwater’s  exceptional  success  as  a teacher, 
now  seems  to  me  to  have  been  due  very  largely  to 
two  things  ; First,  the  force  or  weight  of  his  per- 
sonal character  which  compelled  both  respectful  be- 
havior and  sustained  attention  from  the  class ; 
and  second,  a power  of  absolute  clearness  in  state- 
ment and  explication Besides  these,  his 

teaching  was  marked  by  a trait  which  I take 
to  be  a great  merit,  namely,  that  he  threw  himself 
most  heartily  into  great  subjects.  The  doctrines  of 
immediate  perception,  of  real  as  distinct  from  rela- 
tive knowledge,  of  causation,  and  in  moral  science 
of  the  absoluteness  of  the  idea  of  right,  and  of  the 
determination  of  the  will,  were  among  the  subjects 
upon  which  in  our  class  he  placed  the  greatest  em- 


* Prof.  John  De  Witt,  D.D.,  Lane  Seminary. 


70 


phasis.  I recall  also  with  what  interest  and  ability 
he  urged  upon  us  the  value  and  fruitfulness  of  for- 
mal Logic  and  Metaphysics  in  a Lecture,  in  which 
he  attacked  Macaulay’s  opposite  contention  in  his 
article  on  Bacon.”  Another,*  whose  sparkling  let- 
ter I would  gladly  give  entire  if  time  permitted, 
speaks  as  follows  ; “ His  characteristics  as  a teacher 
were  these  ; (i)  Sympathy  with  the  student.  He 
respected  the  nature  of  the  pupil.  He  made  him 
feel  that  he  was  his  friend.  I may  safely  say  he 
loved  the  boys,  and  consequently  they  loved  him. 
They  sought  his  advice  ; they  told  him  their  troubles. 
(2)  Simplicity  in  the  presentation  of  truth.  His 
mind  was  as  clear  as  a bell,  and  his  method  was 
as  clear  as  his  mind.  One  could  not  help  following 
him.  He  possessed  in  a remarkable  degree  the 
power  of  communicating  to  other  minds  that  which 
lay  in  his  own.  (3)  Suggestiveness.  He  gave  the 
student  credit  for  some  brains.  He  created  an  ap- 
petite, but  did  not  satiate  it.  He  led  the  boys  into 
the  path,  turned  them  in  the  right  direction,  then 
said.  Now  go  on  for  yourselves.  He  removed  the 
scales  from  their  eyes  and  left  them  to  do  their  own 
seeing.  He  understood  the  meaning  of  the  word 
Educate,  and  therefore  his  aim  in  the  class-room 
was  not  to  fill  our  minds  with  his  thoughts,  but  to 

* Rev.  Thomas  B.  McLeod,  Clinton  Ave.  Con.  Church,  Brook- 
lyn. 


71 


awaken  thought  and  the  power  of  thought  in  us  ; 
not  to  impress  his  mind  on  us,  but  to  draw  out  our 
own.”  Another,*  says  : “ In  all  the  branches  which 
he  taught  he  showed  himself  a master — always  in- 
teresting, instructive,  and  especially  clear.  His  cus- 
tom was  to  give  us  an  analysis  of  the  Lecture  writ- 
ten out  on  the  blackboard,  and  the  value  of  his 
teaching  largely  lay  in  the  perfect  system  to  which 
he  reduced  everything,  so  that  those  who  ran  might 
read.”  A member  of  the  class  of  ’8 if  has  the  fol- 
lowing; “ In  all  his  branches.  Dr.  Atwater’s  method 
of  teaching  was  liberal  and  just.  He  had  his  own 
well-defined  opinions,  which  he  did  not  hesitate  to 
affirm  ; but  to  the  student  he  always  gave  the  largest 
liberty.  In  the  class-room,  at  least  during  more 
recent  years,  the  exercises  often  took  the  form  of 
free  question  and  answer,  in  which  the  student 
was  not  the  only  one  questioned,  and  the  more 
formal  recitation  was  now  and  then  adjourned  in 
favor  of  an  orderly  and  earnest  discussion.  There 
was  in  Dr.  Atwater  no  trace  of  the  disposition  to 
entrap  a student.  A recitation  with  him  was  not  an 
opportunity  to  torture  a youth  into  an  exhibition  of 
all  he  failed  to  know,  but  one  to  draw  out  the  best 
in  each  man,  and  to  bring  out  the  underlying  truths 
of  the  subject  to  the  whole  class.”  But  these  ut- 


* Prof.  W.  B.  Scott,  Princeton. 


t Mr.  A.  C.  Armstrong. 


72 


terances  must  suffice ; the  rather  as  they  are  only 
individual  echoes  of  the  great  chorus  of  grateful 
appreciation  that  comes  from  all  who  were  privi- 
leged to  sit  at  Dr.  Atwater’s  feet. 

In  the  government  of  the  College  his  influence 
was  as  marked  as  it  was  in  his  own  class-room.  No 
member  of  the  Faculty  contributed  more  to  the 
peace  and  good  order  of  the  Institution  than  did 
he,  and  that  because  he  had  the  implicit  confidence 
alike  of  the  students  and  of  his  fellow-professors. 
He  stood  between  the  two,  and  interpreted  the  one 
to  the  other  ; nay,  such  was  the  absolute  fairness  of 
his  judgment,  and  the  inherent  kindliness  of  his  heart, 
that  every  student  who  had  so  far  forgotten  himself 
as  to  make  himself  liable  to  punishment,  went  to 
him  for  counsel,  and  never  went  in  vain.  As  one 
has  said,  “ Those  who  went  frankly  to  him  in 
trouble  always  spoke  of  his  unfaltering  kindness  and 
sympathy.  The  sin  was  there,  and  he  would  not 
tolerate  nor  palliate  that ; but  the  wrong-doer,  unless 
hopelessly  depraved,  was  not  an  object  of  condem- 
nation so  much  as  of  pity  and  aid.  He  was  not 
forgetful  of  a young  man’s  heart  and  ways  ; and  he 
could  see  in  a young  man’s  thoughts  all  the  strength 
and  truth  in  them,  although  he  was  incapable  of 
appreciating  the  peculiar  principles  of  undergradu- 
ate ethics.”*  A touching  illustration  of  the  truth 


A.  C.  Armstrong,  class  of  *8i. 


73 


of  these  statements  came  incidentally  to  my  knowl- 
edge, in  connection  with  his  funeral  services.  In 
the  crowd  that  stood  around  his  open  grave,  there 
was  one  who  had  come  all  the  way  from  Chicago 
to  show  his  affection  for  his  beloved  teacher.  And 
well  he  might,  for  when  the  question  had  been  be- 
fore the  Faculty  whether  he  should  be  expelled  or 
not.  Dr.  Atwater  had  said  : “ It  is  true  he  deserves 
expulsion,  but  give  the  boy  another  chance,  and 
perhaps  this  may  prove  the  turning  point  in  his 
career,”  and  the  intercession  had  prevailed,  and  he 
had  taken  the  admonition  to  heart,  so  that  he  was 
there  with  tears  in  his  eyes,  feeling  that  he  owed  all 
he  was  to  his  venerable  instructor.  Thus  for  con- 
siderably more  than  a quarter  of  a century  he  labored 
at  this  centre  of  education,  sending  his  influence 
not  only  through  this  land,  but  over  the  world  in 
blessing,  and  growing  in  all  the  elements  of  power 
ever  unto  the  last ; nay,  it  might  even  be  said,  that 
he  was  then  most  lovable  of  all,  and  that  like  the 
sun  he  seemed  “largest  at  his  setting.” 

Of  his  long  last  illness  there  is  little  to  be  said.  It 
was  one  of  alternations  ; sometimes  giving  promise  of 
recovery,and  sometimes  giving  presage  of  dissolution; 
but  through  it  all,  he  was  the  same  quiet,  cheerful, 
undemonstrative,  humble,  unselfish,  always-consider- 
ate-for-others  Christian  that  he  had  been  through 
life.  One  characteristic  circumstance,  illustrating 


74 


the  ruling  bent  of  his  mind,  may  be  given.  In  Oc- 
tober, when  he  was  first  prostrated  with  pneumonia, 
he  would  lie  at  times  as  if  asleep.  After  his  partial 
convalescence,  he  said  to  the  members  of  his  family, 
that  when  they  had  doubtless  considered  him  to  be 
sleeping,  he  was  in  reality  thinking  with  unusual 
energy  ; that  his  mind  seemed  stimulated  to  extra- 
ordinary acuteness  on  very  profound  subjects,  reach- 
ing with  great  rapidity  conclusions  which  in  health 
would  have  been  arrived  at  only  after  much  longer 
thought.  He  added  that  he  should  like  to  get  well 
enough  to  put  some  of  those  thoughts  on  paper. 
But  he  never  recovered  so  far  as  to  do  that.  The 
fact  is  striking,  not  only  as  showing  the  leanings  of 
his  own  nature,  but  also  as  throwing  at  least  a little 
light  on  the  dark  mystery  that  enshrouds, the  border- 
land. At  length,  however,  the  darkness  deepened  ; 
or  let  me  rather  say,  the  new  day  dawned — and  on 
the  morning  of  the  17th  February,  1883,  his  spirit 
passed  into  the  presence  of  his  God.  Then  a few 
days  after,  “ devout  men  carried  him  to  his  burial, 
and  made  great  lamentation  over  him.” 

In  seeking  to  estimate  Dr.  Atwater’s  character 
and  abilities,  we  are  struck  at  once  with  his  great 
versatility.  He  was  not  so  much  a man  peculiarly 
gifted  in  any  one  particular,  as  fully  developed  and 
well  rounded  in  a great  many.  His  articles  ranged 
over  theological,  philosophical,  ecclesiastical,  and 


75 


sociological  subjects,  some  of  them  dealing  with 
topics  so  abstruse  as  “ the  power  of  contrary  choice,” 
and  others  with  matters  so  praetical  as  “ the  venti- 
lation of  churches,”  and  in  all  he  was  at  home, — 
though  if  I may  speak  from  my  own  judgment 
merely,  he  was  specially  eminent  in  the  department 
of  Political  Economy,  and  treated  questions  relating 
to  curreney  and  commerce,  money  and  labor,  with 
the  hand  of  a master.  As  a student  he  was  almost 
equally  great  in  classics,  philosophy,  and  mathemat- 
ics, and  this  early  balance  was  maintained  through 
life.  His  imagination  was  receptive  rather  than 
creative  ; and  the  same  was  true  of  his  humor.  He 
did  not  often  make  mirth,  but  those  who  heard  his 
laugh  when  he  was  thoroughly  amused  would  not 
soon  forget  its  heartiness. 

His  industry  was  simply  marvellous.  It  seems 
to  me,  that  for  years  he  did  the  work  of  two  or  three 
ordinary  men  ; and  yet  he  was  never  in  a hurry. 
He  did  everything  with  deliberation,  and,  I may 
add,  he  seemed  to  do  everything  with  ease.  He  never 
appeared  to  be  making  an  effort.  Always  he  gave 
you  the  impression  that  there  was  in  him  still  an 
immense  reserve  of  force,  and  that,  if  he  chose,  he 
could  bring  much  greater  strength  into  play.  He  had 
great  practical  wisdom  and  executive  ability,  and 
could  manage  men  and  arrange  details  with  admi- 
rable skill.  On  boards  and  committees,  at  Faculty 


meetings,  and  in  ecclesiastical  councils,  he  was  al- 
ways a host  in  himself,  and  very  often,  like  “ the 
willing  horse,”  he  got  the  burden  to  carry.  He  was 
pre-eminently  judicial.  Mark  I said  judicial,  not 
judicious.  Your  mere  judicious  man  will  set  him- 
self to  dodge  difficulties,  but  the  judicial  to  solve 
them.  What  Dr.  Atwater  sought  was  not  so  much 
to  avoid  trouble  and  annoyance,  as  to  get  at  that 
which  was  right ; and  his  calm,  deliberate  way  of 
looking  at  things,  enabled  him  to  go  all  round  a 
case,  and  reach  its  true  decision.  Had  he  given 
himself  to  the  profession  of  the  law,  he  would  have 
become  the  most  eminent  of  judges — because  his  in- 
herent love  of  righteousness,  and  his  admirable  com- 
mon-sense would  have  brushed  away  all  sophistry 
and  brought  the  truth  to  light. 

But  more  magnetic  than  all  his  mental  qualities  was 
his  tender-heartedness.  It  was  a true  instinct  that  im- 
pelled the  boys  to  go  to  him  when  they  were  in  per- 
plexity, for  when  they  took  hold  of  his  heart,  they  took 
hold  of  his  strength,  and,  provided  they  dealt  frankly 
and  truthfully  with  him,  they  were  sure  of  his  help. 
Then  pervading  all  his  other  excellences  and  giving 
its  own  tincture  to  them  all,  was  his  simple  and  sin- 
cere piety.  He  was  a genuine  Christian,  and  his 
Christianity  was  coextensive  with  his  life.  It  lay  over 
it  like  the  atmosphere  ; it  illumined  it  like  a sun  ; 
and  like  these  two  in  the  natural  world,  it  brought 


77 


out  in  it  all  the  fulness  of  fragrance,  foliage,  flower, 
and  fruit,  by  which  it  was  enriched.  William  Arnot 
said  of  his  friend,  James  Hamilton,  that  he  would 
be  disposed  to  arrange  his  preaching,  his  books,  and 
his  life  in  the  relations  of  good,  better,  and  best. 
Were  I to  speak  similarly  of  Dr.  Atwater  as  an  au- 
thor, as  a professor,  and  as  a man,  it  would  be  in 
the  same  order  of  comparison.  As  an  author  he 
was  good,  as  a professor  he  was  better,  but  as  a ma?i 
he  was  best  of  all.  It  was  a happy  determination 
of  the  members  of  the  class  of  ’83  to  endow  a prize 
that  shall  perpetuate  his  name ; but  it  will  be  a 
worthier  tribute  to  his  excellence,  if  they,  and  all 
who  have  enjoyed  his  instructions,  will  set  them- 
selves to  carry  out  the  principles  which  he  enforced 
upon  them,  and  to  reproduce  that  full-orbed  Chris- 
tian manhood  which  he  so  nobly  exemplified. 


4- 


4 


